• Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Does anyone else feel like this entire post and most of the comments are coming straight from a Monsanto bot/shill factory?

  • P00ptart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Yeah, except the vast majority of seeds are infertile, meaning they can’t be replanted, means the “good ol boys” can’t survive.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Where the fuck do people come up with this shit?

      No the “vast majority” of crops are not infertile. They are hybrids. Farmers buy the seeds because of a genetic phenomenon called heterosis AKA hybrid vigor. It takes expertise and a shit ton of money to make hybrid seed. If growers could get the same performance from saving their own seeds only an absolute dumbfuck would buy seeds from a seed company.

      Now there are a few species that hybrids can only be made by taking advantage of mutants that have male sterility genes. The resulting hybrids are still fertile (produce viable female gametes) but need an outside source of pollen. Examples: onions, sunflowers and carrots.

      The only “sterile” seed sold is seedless watermelon aka triploid seed. Seedless watermelons are only sold because the market demands it thanks to a push by the USDA after being created in Japan pre-WW2. The margins on seedless watermelon seed are often 40-50% less than hybrid diploid seed. And don’t get me started on the research cost - 14-15 generations for a new female line versus 7-8 for seeded types.

      • P00ptart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Most hybrids do not produce fertile seeds. You can test it out if you want but it doesn’t work. I used to work for a seed company. Beyond that, without fertilizer the soil itself is dead in the vast majority of farming land.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 minutes ago

          I have planted seeds from round up ready soy beans. They grew just fine for my needs, which wasn’t farming. Farmers have also planted harvested hybrid seeds, Monsanto sues the ones they catch, because it’s a contract violation for those that bought seeds.

  • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Source that research was banned since the 90s? All I’m aware of is that they aren’t available commercially and sale and field testing of terminator seeds has been banned since the 00s.

    • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yeah they weren’t banned in the 90s. They were developed in the mid 90s with a patent filed in 1998. The UN Convention on Biological Diversity adopted a moratorium in 2000, recommending that governments block field testing and commercial use of terminator seeds, but didn’t yet ban research. In 2006 they expanded the moratorium, explicitly prohibiting field trials and emphasizing risks to biodiversity and farmers rights.

  • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    207
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    They’re not sterile, but they will sue you if they find you’ve been growing seeds from last year’s crops.

      • IMongoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I don’t think they’ve successfully sued anyone for that. The few cases I saw last time I looked people were intentionally germinating or saving/selling seeds.

        • ADKSilence@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          So uhh… hypothetically if one were to live next to a cornfield and acquire some seeds from said field cough somehow cough, would those purely hypothetical seeds grown in one’s garden then constitute corn piracy?

          Asking for a friend of course.

          • The_v@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Saving seed for the farms own use is expressly allowed under plant variety protection and patent laws in the U.S.

            This is why the seed companies created contracts that they require all growers to sign before being allowed to purchase GMO crops. The prohibition from saving seed is from the signed agreement not from the patent or PVP.

            Say if you got grain from the farmer for your bird feeder. Then if you happen to use the grain as seed to plant some for next year’s bird feeder — completely legal. You are not bound by the agreement between the farmer/seed company. Unless you try to sell the grain/seed to another person. Then you are in violation of the seed companies patent in the U.S.

            Remember that corn shows a severe amount of inbreeding depression. So the F2 plant will not produce as much as the farmers F1 did the year before.

            • weker01@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              7 hours ago

              That is a reason why most farmers like to purchase seeds every season anyways. It’s way more predictable and you may want to change the strain depending on many variables.

              Farming, especially commodity crops like wheat, is an extremely risky business. Taking out some risk is often worth it.

              Modern farming is way more complicated and scientific than most people realize. The portrayal of farmers as bumbling idiots in popular media is not helping.

    • culpritus [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      19 hours ago

      or if/when your neighbors pollen blows onto your crops and you grow from those seeds, and then they sue you for being a pirate of their IP

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      19 hours ago

      No they won’t.

      They will sue you if you take your neighbors pesticide resistant seeds, sow them, douse them in pesticide so only the resistant ones survive, and sow your entire field with them.

  • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Finally. FINALLY. My ulcer grows every time I hear someone quote that list of evil things Monsanto does. Even though yes, they are evil.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Monsanto doesn’t even exist anymore. It was bought out by the totally not evil company Bayer a while back.

      Of course Bayer has suffered quite a bit of indigestion over gobling up that morsel over the years.

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Yea, they’re evil enough with the pesticides, and the hostile takeover of farms. We don’t need to make the genetic engineering they’re doing, which is actually good work, to also be thrown under the bus

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I would agree if they didn’t use their non-sterile plants to take over small farms around their huge ones by suing for theft when farmers used part of the previous crop that had been pollinated with the Monsanto GM pollen. They didn’t buy that genome so it was stolen… Fucking wankers.

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Isn’t one argument against GMO that they could spread and outcompete other crops? In that case a terminator gene would even be a good thing?

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Also, most farmers use hybrid crops, which you already can’t save, because they’re hybrids. (You can save them, but they’re not going to produce the same plants you get them from).

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Whether a plant species is hybridized has little effect on whether it grows true from seed or only via cuttings.

      Wild maple trees for example do not grow true from seed.

  • Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Companies DO irradiate non organic ginger though, sterilizing it, before shipping it to stores.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      At this point, I barely even buy tomatoes to put into food anymore. If mom’s been growing them in her greenhouse any given year, I’ll eat a few off the vine. The stuff in stores? Ehh, it barely has flavour.

      • The_v@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Not even close.

        Seedless watermelons are a triploid. These are hybrid between a tetraploid female and a diplod male. The plant has three copies of every chromosome and is unable to produce fertile gametes aka completely sterile.

        Fruit formation is triggered by fertile diploid pollen (planted in the field In a 4:1 ratio). The fruit then continues to grow without embryo formation in the fruit seeds (pips).

        • The Giant Korean@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          14 hours ago

          They’re often treated with hormones.

          I sort of misspoke with regard to watermelons -

          Seedless watermelons are created by crossing a regular watermelon with 22 chromosomes with one that’s been chemically treated to have 44 chromosomes. The resulting hybrid has 33 chromosomes, making it sterile and seedless.

          • dondelelcaro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            This is a bit misleading. You only need to treat the first generation of 2n watermelon with colchicine (which inhibits the movement of chromosomes during metaphase) to produce a 4n watermelon. Once you have a 4n watermelon, subsequent generations do not require colchicine treatment.

          • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Not the person you replied to but thanks. Doesn’t that contradict the meme ?

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I’m not a native English speaker but that sounds like it’s talking about the potential harms of such terminator seeds and not saying they’re in the market as of now.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      That entire page says “this would be a bad thing to exist”. But it doesn’t. There are no commercial terminator seeds.

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Well, it says “this would be a bad thing to sell,” my read is that it exists and Monsanto owns the IP.

        • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I’d say “that’s the point” if this was put out by modern media…both sides are doing this to build engagement and support. That is, writing about something, but hiding the fact that it’s nothing. They take a small fact that on its own is true…but is really quite unimportant to the larger question. They then build up on that one small fact and make it out to be a smoking gun.

          They may even leave out completely relevant facts. Like in this article it says “Monsanto pledged to not commercialize the seed,” but doesn’t mention the UN COP8 moratorium on them.

          But the other thing is…op posted this from a college website, possibly because they think it’s an academic paper…but it’s not. It’s a summary of case studies in from their CONS200 “Foundations of conservation” program.